EXF 2023 Professional Development Needs Assessment Report

Community Engagement Community engagement was defined as being related to asset mapping, community development, keeping Extension programs relevant, motivational interviewing, needs assessment, networking, partnership development, relationship building, volunteer development and management, and working with communities, elected officials, and stakeholders. Findings related to Community Engagement training needs are provided in Table 16.

Table 16 Training needs ranked from greatest to least based on percent responses associated with Community Engagement provided by Land-grant institution type.

Institutional Rank from Highest to Lowest % Responses

Community Engagement Training

All Institutions

1862

1890

1994 Rank

Keeping Extension programs relevant

1 - 11.50

1 - 11.38

1 - 14.10%

2 - 8.82 

Partnership development

2 - 9.22

2 - 9.20

2 - 11.54 

3 - 5.88 

Working with communities

3 - 9.07

3 - 8.96 

3 - 10.26%

1 - 11.76 

Needs assessment

4 - 8.55

3 - 8.96 

7 - 3.85%

3 - 5.88 

Working with elected officials

5 - 8.26

4 - 8.39

5 - 6.41 

3 - 5.88 

Relationship building

6 - 7.96

5 - 7.75 

2 - 11.54 

3 - 5.88 

Volunteer development

7 - 7.82

5 - 7.75 

4 - 7.69 

2 - 8.82 

Community development

8 - 7.37 

7.34

5 - 6.41 

1 - 11.76 

Working with stakeholders

8 - 7.37 

6 - 7.43

4 - 7.69 

3 - 5.88 

Asset mapping

9 - 6.78 

8 - 6.94

6 - 5.13 

3 - 5.88 

Volunteer management

9 - 6.78 

9 - 6.86

6 - 5.13 

3 - 5.88 

Networking

10 - 4.87

10 - 4.52

4 - 7.69 

11.76 

Motivational interviewing

11 - 3.91

11 - 3.95

8 - 2.56%

3 - 5.88 

Other (please explain)

12 - 0.52

12 - 0.56 No Responses

No Responses

Number of Question Responses

1356

1239

78

34

 Items are tied for first ranking within the specific land grant group.   tems are tied for second ranking within the specific land grant group.  Items are tied for third ranking within the specific land grant group.  Items are tied for fourth ranking within the specific land grant group.  Items are tied for fifth ranking within the specific land grant group.  Items are tied for sixth ranking within the specific land grant group.  Items are tied for eighth ranking within the specific land grant group.  Items are tied for ninth ranking within the specific land grant group.

There is consistency across the Land-grant types with emphasis on training needed to keep Extension programs relevant, encourage partnership development, and support working with communities. The 1890 and 1994 Land-grants seem to have closer rankings of the subcategories with there being only three total rankings for the 1994 categories. This suggests this is an area where there is need for broad coverage, especially for the 1994 Land-grants. Other subcategories recommended for community engagement by 1862 respondents in the other responses included: interpersonal and group conflict management, civil rights, DEI, facilitation, and “working with on - campus faculty to get them involved in a positive community engagement off- campus.” Related to the issue of relevance, an 1862 Land-grant respondent shared, “Some of our programs serving the public are no longer available despite being publicly funded for the purpose of disaster recovery. This is criminal and negligent misuse of funds and resources where one or two people refused to discuss team breakdown and establish

24

Powered by